Eating sweet snacks: gender differences in attitudes and behaviour.

This paper reports a study of gender differences in the components of the Theory of Reasoned Action in relation to eating sweet snacks, and the role of these components in predicting sweet-snacking in women and men. Totals of 65 women and 64 men completed questionnaires assessing attitudes and behaviours towards eating sweet snacks. Women were more ambivalent towards eating sweet snacks than men, perceiving eating sweet snacks to be significantly less healthy (t(127) = - 2.43, p < 0.02), and more pleasant (t(127) = 2.52, p < 0.01). There were no statistically significant gender differences in outcome beliefs x evaluations, subjective norms, normative belief x motivation to comply, or in behavioural intention, although some gender differences were found within components. Women scored significantly higher (t(127) = 5.54, p < 0.0005) on restraint items from the Dutch Eating Behaviour Questionnaire, including those on snacking (t(127) = 5.04; p < 0.0005), but did not differ significantly from men on reported frequency of eating sweet snacks. There were gender differences in the predictive power of components of the Theory of Reasoned Action. Women's intentions to eat sweet snacks were predicted by perceived social pressure and attitudes towards sweet snacks. Men's intentions were only predicted significantly by attitudes. It is concluded that men's sweet-snacking is less influenced by social pressure than is women's.